3 ms·
Two main reasons: 1) Our processing can't be done realtime (i.e. it takes more than 1 second per second of video), at least for now, so there would need to be
by bkrausz 16y ago
Two main reasons:
1) Our processing can't be done realtime (i.e. it takes more than 1 second per second of video), at least for now, so there would need to be a lag that can get significant if they user has a slow enough computer.
2) We currently don't require any software to be installed client-side (we use Flash + JS), which we consider a big perk.
- jacquesm 16y agoI can see the advantage of not having to install client side stuff, but if that's such a performance penalty that you have to charge so much more you're opening yourself up to competition by someone that does the same thing but finds a way to do it client side. Looks like you have a bunch of tough optimisation ahead, much good luck with that. Very nice idea by the way, eye tracking used to be the domain of specialised setups using cameras behind half-transparent mirrors, it's quite impressive that you've gotten this far with just a cheap webcam as an input device.
- jonknee 16y agoMaybe you could offer to pay your testers more if they're willing to do the processing (which requires a download). Depending on how much your processing costs are you could even distribute it @home style.